SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 MarsdenLR 3017

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MAYBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD – Appellant
Versus
WWE HOLDINGS BHD – Respondent


Table of Content
1. garnishee proceedings require an agreed acknowledgment of debt. (Para 1 , 6)
2. existence and acknowledgment of debts are essential in garnishee actions. (Para 2 , 16)
3. enforcement of a judgment debt through garnishee proceedings. (Para 4)
4. pending disputes do not negate established debts in garnishee cases. (Para 5 , 25)
5. principles governing what constitutes a debt for garnishment. (Para 7 , 9 , 11)
6. the definition and application of debts under garnishee proceedings. (Para 12 , 14)
7. recognition that counterclaims do not impede the garnishment of acknowledged debts. (Para 20 , 23)

[1] This appeal relates to the enforcement of a judgment debt of the sum of RM12,117,646.88 which is due and owing from the judgment debtor, Ibsul Holdings Sdn Bhd ["JD"] to the appellant. The appellant sought to enforce the judgment debt through garnishee proceedings under O 49 of the Rules of 2012. The learned Judge allowed the respondent's appeal against the order of the learned SAR who had granted a garnishee order absolute on 11 January 2016. Upon proper consideration, we unanimously allowed the appeal, set aside the decision of the High Court and reinstated the decision of th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top